О происхождении махаяны

ДмитрийБ
А вы спросите у этого бханте, зачем он написал это, если у него нет доказательств?

Одни говорят - мы таких, как Годхика, называем "архатами, которые могут отпадать от плода".
Другие говорят - таких, как Годхика, мы называем анагаминами, достигающими архатства в момент гибели тела.

Почему? По-моему, нормальный вопрос, он же буддист, не растает.

Топперу же нельзя задавать неудобные вопросы, по мнению Дмитрия. Вдруг он лопнет. А тут и подавно

Этак вообще ни одного чётко установленного понятия не останется. Давайте арахант всё же будет арахантом.

The perfected being (arhat): Part 3 of 3;641 F 251–73
BAC.5.1. The six types of perfected beings;642 F 251–72
We have seen that: “If the perfected beings are unshakable (akopya), after the cognition of exhaustion
(kṣayajñāna) there arises the cognition of non-arising (anutpādajñāna) (vi. 50)”; is this to say that
there are differences among the perfected beings?
56a. Six types of perfected being are known.643
The Sūtra644 mentions that there are six perfected beings (arhat):
1. those who are susceptible of retrogressing (parihāṇadharman);
2. those who are capable at will (to put an end to their existence) (cetanādharman);
3. those who are capable of guarding themselves (against the loss of what has been acquired)
(anurakṣaṇādharman);
4. those who are not shaken from abiding (in the fruit) (sthitākampya);
5. those who are capable of penetrating to (the unshakable ones) (without effort)
(prativedhanādharman); [1 b]
6. the unshakable ones (akopyadharman).
They are defined vi, F 253, 261.

The nine types of perfected being;729 F 272–73
Due to the difference of the (praxis-oriented) faculties, the perfected beings are nine in number.

Classification of self-enlightened ones; F 194–95
Two types of self-enlightened ones (pratyekabuddha) are, in fact, distinguished:
1. those that live in a group (vargacārin) [who also appear during the period of augmentation],
and
2. those who are like rhinoceroses (khaḍgaviṣāṇakalpa).918 <195>
1. The first are the ancient listeners (śrāvakapūrvin) (who obtain the first or the second fruit of the
listeners [śrāvaka]919 under the reign of a Buddha).
According to another opinion, these are also the ordinary worldlings (pṛthagjana) who have realized,
in the vehicle of the listeners, the stages conducive to penetration (nirvedhabhāgīya; vi. 20); in the
course of a subsequent existence, they realize the path by themselves. [9 a] The scholars who follow
this opinion find an argument in the Pūrvakathā920 where they read:
500 practitioners cultivated painful [kaṣṭa] austerities [tapas] on a mountain. A monkey who
had lived in the company of self-enlightened ones, imitated the postures of the selfenlightened
ones in front of them. These practitioners imitated the monkey and, it is said,
obtained the Bodhi of the self-enlightened ones.
It is clear, say these scholars, that these practitioners were not noble ones (ārya), listeners (śrāvaka);
for, if they had formerly obtained a fruit of the listeners, had been liberated from the overesteeming of
morality and certain types of spiritual practices (śīlavrataparāmarśa; v, F 18), they would not have
later cultivated painful austerities.

2. The self-enlightened ones “who are like the rhinoceros,” live alone [ekavihārin].

Вывод, что не надо задавать другим монахам, сделали по результатам этого общения?

Есть деления и критерии. Почему надо именно так как удобнее ДмитриюБ из тхеравады?

Её просто не познать в принципе, если осталась хоть какая-то жажда.

У жажды много делений. У кого то там из святых есть такой косяк типа пристрастия к чувственному. У анагаминов, что ли.

Арьей, а не архатом.

А эти критерии из Тхеравады? Вы-то как хотите можете. Но коль скоро ДмитрийБ из Тхеравады, то ему и надо - из Тхеравады. Это же логично.